Subject: RE: [Disman] Propose Resolution to iesg-1 and iesg-5 (take 3)

From: "Sharon Chisholm" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:34:09 -0500

Hi

Based on some further suggestions from Bert, here is the latest proposal.

----
The following is the proposed resolution to IESG-1 and IESG-5

In the description for IanaItuProbableCause, replace the description 

"ITU probable cause values. Duplicate values defined in X.733
           are appended with X733 to ensure uniqueness. Probable cause
           value 0 is reserved for special purposes.

           The Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) is responsible
           for the assignment of all Internet numbers, including
           various SNMP-related numbers, and specifically, new
           IANAItuProbableCause values. Values of
           IANAItuProbableCause less than 1024 are reserved for causes
           that correspond to ITU probable cause. IANAItuProbableCause
           of 0 is reserved for special purposes and therefore cannot
           be assigned. See http://www.iana.org"

With

"          ITU-T probable cause values. Duplicate values defined in X.733
           are appended with X733 to ensure syntactic uniqueness. Probable
cause
           value 0 is reserved for special purposes.

           The Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) is responsible
           for the assignment of the enumerations in this TC. 
           IANAItuProbableCause value of 0 is reserved for special 
           purposes and MUST NOT be assigned.

           Values of IANAItuProbableCause in the range 1 to 1023 are
reserved 
           for causes that correspond to ITU-T probable cause. 

           All other requests for new causes will be handled on a
first-come, 
           first served basis and will be assigned enumeration values
starting 
           with 1025. 

           Request should  come in the form of well-formed SMI [RFC2578]
           for enumeration names that are unique and sufficiently
descriptive.

           While some effort will be taken to ensure that new probable
causes
           do not conceptually duplicate existing probable causes it is 
           acknowledged that the existence of conceptual duplicates in the
           starting probable cause list is an known industry reality.

           To aid IANA in the administration of probable cause names and
values,
           the OPS Area Director will appoint one or more experts to help
review
           requests.

           See http://www.iana.org

           "

Sharon

-----Original Message-----
From: Chisholm, Sharon [CAR:0S00:EXCH] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 4:45 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Disman] Propose Resolution to iesg-1 and iesg-5 (take 2)

Hi

Here is an updated proposed resolution based on Bert's comments

-----

The following is the proposed resolution to IESG-1 and IESG-5

In the description for IanaItuProbableCause, replace the description 

"ITU probable cause values. Duplicate values defined in X.733
           are appended with X733 to ensure uniqueness. Probable cause
           value 0 is reserved for special purposes.

           The Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) is responsible
           for the assignment of all Internet numbers, including
           various SNMP-related numbers, and specifically, new
           IANAItuProbableCause values. Values of
           IANAItuProbableCause less than 1024 are reserved for causes
           that correspond to ITU probable cause. IANAItuProbableCause
           of 0 is reserved for special purposes and therefore cannot
           be assigned. See http://www.iana.org"

With

"          ITU-T probable cause values. Duplicate values defined in X.733
           are appended with X733 to ensure syntactic uniqueness. Probable
cause
           value 0 is reserved for special purposes.

           The Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) is responsible
           for the assignment of all Internet numbers. IANAItuProbableCause
           of 0 is reserved for special purposes and MUST NOT
           be assigned.

           Values of IANAItuProbableCause in the range 1 to 1023 are
reserved 
           for causes that correspond to ITU-T probable cause. All other
requests
           for new causes will be handled on a first-come, first served
basis and
           will be assigned enumeration values starting with 1025. Request
should 
           come in the form of well-formed SMI [RFC2578] for enumeration
names 
           that are unique and sufficiently descriptive.

           While some effort will be taken to ensure that new probable
causes
           do not conceptually duplicate existing probable causes it is 
           acknowledged that the existence of conceptual duplicates in the
           starting probable cause list is an known industry reality.

           To aid IANA in the administration of probable cause names and
values,
           the Management Area Director will appoint an expert to help
review
           requests.

           See http://www.iana.org

           "

Sharon Chisholm
Portfolio Integration
Nortel Networks
Ottawa, Canada

---

From: "Sharon Chisholm" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:34:09 -0500

Hi

----

With

           See http://www.iana.org

           "

Sharon

-----Original Message-----
From: Chisholm, Sharon [CAR:0S00:EXCH] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 4:45 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Disman] Propose Resolution to iesg-1 and iesg-5 (take 2)

Hi

-----

With

           See http://www.iana.org

           "

Sharon Chisholm
Portfolio Integration
Nortel Networks
Ottawa, Canada

---

From: "tom petch" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 18:00:46 -0000

Sharon

no problems with the new text but :-)
1) where does 1024(other) sit in this?  is it other for the whole range,
other for 1 to1023, other for 1025 - nnnn?
2) is there a similar issue with IANAItuEventType do we need a similar
expanded description for that?
3) the
               IANAItuEventType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
  has in its description
               The Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) is
               responsible for the assignment of all Internet numbers,
               including various SNMP-related numbers, and specifically,
               new IANAEventType values. See http://www.iana.org "
I think an Itu has got lost from there.
4) I never have understood the X733 appendage; what is the duplication
between which two (or more) lists where?  I assume the whole list is
present in X.733 as well as in this document so where else?

Tom Petch
[email-masked]

---

From: "tom petch" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 18:00:46 -0000

Sharon

Tom Petch

---

From: "Sharon Chisholm" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:40:50 -0500

Hi

While I sending this email, I'm just going to add that I think we are all
happy with the issues raised as part of the IESG review so I'm going to go
ahead and issue the update.

I event type is fairly straight forward and the IESG did not raise any
specific issues with it, so I think it's fine as is. 

To answer your other questions, 1024 is the other for the entire list. I
think this is the de factor interpretation of this type of enumeration.

I think the typo in 3 was already raised, but I'll be make sure it gets
fixed up.

Thanks,

Sharon

-----Original Message-----
From: tom petch [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 1:01 PM
To: Chisholm, Sharon [CAR:0S00:EXCH]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Disman] Propose Resolution to iesg-1 and iesg-5 (take 3)

Sharon

no problems with the new text but :-)
1) where does 1024(other) sit in this?  is it other for the whole range,
other for 1 to1023, other for 1025 - nnnn?
2) is there a similar issue with IANAItuEventType do we need a similar
expanded description for that?
3) the
               IANAItuEventType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
  has in its description
               The Internet Assigned Number Authority (IANA) is
               responsible for the assignment of all Internet numbers,
               including various SNMP-related numbers, and specifically,
               new IANAEventType values. See http://www.iana.org " I think
an Itu has got lost from there.
4) I never have understood the X733 appendage; what is the duplication
between which two (or more) lists where?  I assume the whole list is present
in X.733 as well as in this document so where else?

Tom Petch

-----Original Message-----
From: Sharon Chisholm <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked] <[email-masked]>
Date: 21 January 2004 20:37
Subject: RE: [Disman] Propose Resolution to iesg-1 and iesg-5 (take 3)

>           are appended with X733 to ensure syntactic uniqueness. 
>Probable cause
>           To aid IANA in the administration of probable cause names 
>and values,
>           the OPS Area Director will appoint one or more experts to 
>help review
>           requests.
>
>           See http://www.iana.org
>
>           "
>
>Sharon
>
>           are appended with X733 to ensure syntactic uniqueness. 
>Probable cause
>           for causes that correspond to ITU-T probable cause. All 
>other requests
>           will be assigned enumeration values starting with 1025. 
>Request should
>           come in the form of well-formed SMI [RFC2578] for 
>enumeration names
>           To aid IANA in the administration of probable cause names 
>and values,

---

From: "Sharon Chisholm" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:40:50 -0500

Hi

Thanks,

Sharon

-----Original Message-----
From: tom petch [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 1:01 PM
To: Chisholm, Sharon [CAR:0S00:EXCH]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Disman] Propose Resolution to iesg-1 and iesg-5 (take 3)

Sharon

Tom Petch

---

From: "Sharon Chisholm" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:58:03 -0500

Hi

That would be the proposed resolution to the issues ... 

I don't think I can blame that one on my keyboard, which hasn't quite
recovered from its close encounter with a Diet Coke this morning ...

Sharon

-----Original Message-----
From: Chisholm, Sharon [CAR:0S00:EXCH] 
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 3:41 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Disman] Propose Resolution to iesg-1 and iesg-5 (take 3)

Hi

Thanks,

Sharon

-----Original Message-----
From: tom petch [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 1:01 PM
To: Chisholm, Sharon [CAR:0S00:EXCH]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Disman] Propose Resolution to iesg-1 and iesg-5 (take 3)

Sharon

Tom Petch

---

From: "Sharon Chisholm" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 15:58:03 -0500

Hi

Sharon

-----Original Message-----
From: Chisholm, Sharon [CAR:0S00:EXCH] 
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 3:41 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [Disman] Propose Resolution to iesg-1 and iesg-5 (take 3)

Hi

Thanks,

Sharon

-----Original Message-----
From: tom petch [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 1:01 PM
To: Chisholm, Sharon [CAR:0S00:EXCH]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [Disman] Propose Resolution to iesg-1 and iesg-5 (take 3)

Sharon

Tom Petch